Humanities desk
< June 19	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 21 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 20

Elizabeth II

In the event that Elizabeth II were to go senile with dementia and be unable to undertake her duties as sovereign, is there any backup plan in place. For example, is there anyway in which she could be forced to surrender the throne. This hasn't been a problem before but with her advancing years it could very easily become one if she ever did succumb to dementia. Just a question as to whether there are any guidelines in place to deal with such a scenario --Thanks, Hadseys 00:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should a monarch be unable to perform their duties, a regent is appointed (usually the heir to the throne). This happened during George III's periods of insanity. --Tango (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Followup question: In the US, these things are spelled out in the 25th Amendment which supersedes Article II of the Constitution. Where is this spelled out in British(English?) law? To my non-legal minded American eyes, it all seems a bit muddled. There seem to be a few acts that deal with it. Dismas|^(talk) 04:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The British don't deal in such tawdry things as written Constitutions. It's all about precedent and tradition. There has to be an Act of Parliament to install a particular regent, but afaik there's no act that sets out the general rules for when a regent might be necessary, how they might be appointed, and what limitations if any apply to their reign. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 05:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I didn't know that a parliamentary act would be required. How is the requirement of Royal Assent gotten around? It would seem to me that a monarch in need of a regent wouldn't be capable of giving Assent. Nyttend (talk) 05:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, we have an article about this.--Rallette (talk) 06:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The UK position is covered by the Regency Acts, specifically the 1937 Act. Our article states, under Power to make the Declaration of Incapacity, that if three or more persons from among "the wife or husband of the Sovereign, the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons, the Lord Chief Justice of England, and the Master of the Rolls, declare in writing that they are satisfied by evidence which shall include the evidence of physicians that the Sovereign is by reason of infirmity of mind or body incapable for the time being of performing the royal functions or that they are satisfied by evidence that the Sovereign is for some definite cause not available for the performance of those functions, then, until it is declared in like manner that His Majesty has so far recovered His health as to warrant His resumption of the royal functions or has become available for the performance thereof, as the case may be, those functions shall be performed in the name and on behalf of the Sovereign by a Regent." Any such declaration must be made to the Privy Council. The current holders of the relevant positions are, respectively, the Duke of Edinburgh, Kenneth Clarke, John Bercow, Lord Judge, and Lord Neuberger. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Bull Worship in the Mediterranean Basin and Middle East

When did people start bull worshipping and then stop bull worshipping in the ancient Mediterranean Basin and Middle East? Why did the Mediterranean Basin people stop worshipping the bull back then? 99.245.73.51 (talk) 04:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to suggest our bull worship article but that doesn't really help...I'm not sure those are the kinds of questions that can be answered, actually (although I'm sure there has been plenty of speculation). Adam Bishop (talk) 06:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article isn't that bad. It suggests that the worship of bulls started in the Paleolithic period, as shown by cave paintings, and continued through to Mithraism, which was superseded by Christianity by about the 4th century. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that either of those two examples are solid -- cave paintings have often been thought to involve hunting magic, while Mithraism had depictions of Mithra killing a bull more than bull-worship as such... AnonMoos (talk) 07:31, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As Minoan culture featured bulls, perhaps looking into the dates around this culture would help. This website may be a good starting point. --TammyMoet (talk) 07:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The bull seemingly also had a prominent position in the mythology of the people inhabiting Çatalhöyük. The origins of bull worship goes down into prehistoric times, so it is not really possible to provide a starting date. --Saddhiyama (talk) 08:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At a guess (and this is pure original research, so bear that in mind), bull worship died with the end of the Minoan culture, as it was really an aspect of their religion (though note that religious fixations on bulls were not uncommon early civilization - see the epic of Gilgamesh). superficial aspects of it continued on in Roman myth and practice - the Romans were notorious pack-rats for religious tidbits - but there was no really cultural basis for it in Roman society (at best, it was a cult-oriented practice for small groups of Romans). --Ludwigs2 15:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One theory I've read is that there's (supposedly) a very ancient connection between the spring equinox, the constellations of the Zodiac, and various religious rituals and holidays such as Passover and Easter, and aspects of the Mithraic Mysteries. Connections to ancient Egyptian religious emphasis on the sun are sometimes argued--the spring equinox marking the sun's triumph over darkness, etc. Several thousand years ago the sun's position in the Zodiac at the equinox was in the constellation of Taurus, the bull (see Bull (mythology)). This, according to this theory, it why the bull was a sacred symbol in very ancient religions from Egypt to India.

Due to the precession of the equinoxes the sun's position in the Zodiac at the equinox slowly moved "backwards" through the Zodiac. About 3,000 years ago it was no longer in Taurus but Aries, the ram--sheep or lamb. The lamb is still a religious savior symbol, and there are plenty of religious parables using sheep and shepherds as metaphors. And if I understand right, animal sacrifice in ancient times shifted, to some degree, from bulls/cattle to sheep (perhaps the ancient whole offering holocaust sacrifice ritual? Then there's the shofar thing). The symbolism of Osiris is rich, including not only death but rebirth (see Life-death-rebirth deity), the spring equinox, and the ram (note he carries a shepherd's crook). Some people even argue that Christ is essentially a latter-day version of Osiris. See, for example, Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth, which gets into the whole topic of the precession of the equinoxes and the Zodiac's supposed significance to ancient religions. Sometime around the time of Jesus the sun had moved into Pisces at the spring equinox, supposedly contributing to the fish symbol for Christ. And of course today the precession is moving on to Aquarius--thus the Age of Aquarius stuff.

Note I'm not saying any of this is true, and I don't mean to disrespect to any religion, nor do I believe in Astrology--although it clearly played an important role in ancient history. I just find it curious how astronomical processes correlate to history and religion (I know correlation does not imply causation). Anyway, here's a few links on the general topic--no guarantee on their quality (hard to find "rational" sources on this topic): Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth (another version of the one linked above), Pagan and Christian Creeds: Their Origin and Meaning (several long pages), Why do Jews blow the rams horn?, Precession, Christ Myth: Jesus Zodiac (warning: an anti-Christianity website), Symbols of Mithra (part of a longer book), Apocalypse Unsealed (very long, I barely glanced at it, seems out there but covers a lot of Astrological symbolism stuff). Pfly (talk) 17:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I need to point out that people born under the sign of Taurus the bull have made more impact upon history than other signs. The bull has always been associated with strength, will-power, and perserverance.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:33, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmmmmmmmm. That claim would hardly be accepted by anyone, Jeanne, except maybe other astrologers. Producing a list of notable names would not do the trick. I can't imagine there being a generally accepted reputable source that would be of any use either. The cruncher is: what does one mean by "have made more impact upon history", and how does one define that? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:57, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marconi shares

I am in the UK and some years back I got some free Marconi shares - I cannot remember how exactly. Soon after that Marconi got restructured and their shares became worthless, as the cost of selling them would be less than what you'd get for them. Are those Marconi shares still worthless or have they recovered somewhat? They may have changed their name too. Thanks 92.28.240.72 (talk) 11:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A little information on the Telent page. Alansplodge (talk) 12:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lovecraft - Cool Air -strange language

Hope there are lot of Lovecraft fans here. Well, yesterday I was reading his short story Cool Air. Now look at the fifth paragraph:

"Doctair Muñoz," she cried as she rushed upstairs ahead of me, "he have speel hees chemicals. He ees too seeck for doctair heemself—seecker and seecker all the time—but he weel not have no othair for help. He ees vairy queer in hees seeckness—all day he take funnee-smelling baths, and he cannot get excite or warm. All hees own housework he do—hees leetle room are full of bottles and machines, and he do not work as doctair. But he was great once—my fathair in Barcelona have hear of heem—and only joost now he feex a arm of the plumber that get hurt of sudden. He nevair go out, only on roof, and my boy Esteban he breeng heem hees food and laundry and mediceens and chemicals. My Gawd, the sal-ammoniac that man use for keep heem cool!"

Everyone notice the strange wording. This is what I'm curious about why Lovecraft used such strange wordings. If anyone has idea about it please reply. Thanks. --Socilogisto (talk) 11:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that Lovecraft is trying to represent some sort of Hispanic accent and its characteristic rhythms using variant spellings. Nothing more unusual than any other author would do really. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Eye dialect. Deor (talk) 12:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She's from Barcelona! -- AnonMoos (talk) 15:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As others said, it's a common literary device to write out accents in an exaggerated manner. It helps get the "sound" across to the reader. For an extreme version of this, try reading the first bit of My Fair Lady. That's an exercise in pain. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

County of Falkenstein

"Joseph II: In the shadow of Maria Theresa, 1741-1780" refers to a County of Falkenstein on the French border. Can someone provide a link to the article about that state? There seem to be awfully many places named Falkenstein. Surtsicna (talk) 14:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the footnote at the bottom of that page you linked to, this Falkenstein was in the area formerly known as Further Austria. I can't see which, if any, of those Falkensteins was in this area, though. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 15:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it was near France, wouldn't it be this one? There doesn't seem to have been an actual county there at the time, but it could have been an honorary title. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since the source mentions that the County of Falkenstein "was administered as part of the [Habsburg] Monarchy", I doubt it was an honorary title. It would indeed make sense that this is what I am looking for, but the article doesn't say that a state by that name existed in the 18th century. Instead, the article appears to be about a noble family. Surtsicna (talk) 22:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grafschaft Falkenstein [1] says Habsburg acquired it in 1736 by marriage and is now part of Bundesland Rheinland-Pfalz.
Sleigh (talk) 08:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First novel

What was the first novel ever written? --75.25.103.109 (talk) 16:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no definitive answer. For English literature, see First novel in English. Personally I would go with Robinson Crusoe. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 16:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tale of Genji is a candidate.77.86.115.161 (talk) 16:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also Novel#Antecedents_around_the_world for an exposition.77.86.115.161 (talk) 16:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's always Chaucer in English. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 00:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moll Flanders is often taught in university literature courses as the first English novel. Don Quixote is also often taught as the first European novel. Zoonoses (talk) 00:34, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Satyricon is a couple millennia old, and undoubtedly there were many more that haven't survived. It's a bit absurd to suggest that epic fiction in prose (rather than verse) is a post-Renaissance invention. Who knows how many novels were burned at Alexandria? or lost among the antiquities of the Egyptians? 63.17.73.196 (talk) 07:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is still quite a few Greek and Hellenistic novels extant. The book "The Novel in Antiquity" by Thomas Hägg is somewhat of a modern scholarly classic on the subject. --Saddhiyama (talk) 08:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Aethiopica is probably the most famous ancient "novel"... AnonMoos (talk) 15:47, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You think? I'd have said Daphnis and Chloe. Deor (talk) 17:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Bible? Eerie Lamp Stand (talk) 11:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The last time I checked such things over a quarter of Americans surveyed considered the Bible a literal recording of events. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 13:51, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

80% of British people know that Great Expectations is a true story, but that doesn't mean it doesn't count as a novel... Eerie Lamp Stand (talk) 14:21, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Especially the bit where Abel Magwitch swims across the Thames Estuary in leg irons Alansplodge (talk) 17:03, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Related trivia: Magwitch was inspired by a well-known family of habitual criminals in Portsmouth (where Dickens was born). Dickens changed their real name slightly to avoid a possible libel suit, and I will not repeat it here because they are still extant and active! 87.81.230.195 (talk) 17:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Bible is actually a "library" or a collection of diverse documents written for different purposes during a number of chronological periods (and doesn't claim otherwise), so it's hard to say how it could be a "novel" in any very meaningful sense of the word... AnonMoos (talk)

I believe the Book of Ruth has sometimes been so described, although on length grounds it's more of a novelette. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 17:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As Abbott and Costello taught us, "who's on first" depends on the interpretation of words, significantly, "who" and" "first." "Novel" will always remain problematic in this context. What traits qualify? All forms of communication, literature or text, as you will, have some precursor. Who wrote the first epic? Where, for instance, is the sharp line of demarcation between "romance" and "novel"? Evading such fallacious assumptions as such an essentialist definition of "novel" necessarily assumes, I can do no better than follow the line of sight pointed to by the bony finger of Lionel Trilling's exemplary definition: "all prose fiction is a variation on the theme of Don Quixote ... the problem of appearance and reality" (The Liberal Imagination: Essays on Literature and Society, Viking, 1950, pp. 207 & 209). Many common readers, and a good many of the remaining humane humanities scholars as well, share his expansive, life-enhancing view of the modern novel at its best. An almost purely random sampling: Harold Bloom (whose short review and detailed Lectures on Don Quixote are not to be missed) and a host of others regard Don Quixote as, at the least, the first modern European novel, and quite possibly the greatest and most influential novel of all time. Given the chance, why not define the birth of the genre by, arguably, one of its greatest exemplars? Paulscrawl (talk) 23:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would be the Ibsenist approach: My book is poetry, and if it is not, then it shall be. The Norwegian conception of poetry shall be made to fit my book. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that learned and witty answer, Paulscrawl. However I must assume that you are simplifying the definition of the modern novel, "the problem of appearance and reality" somewhat for the sake of brevity? Otherwise a novel such as The Golden Ass by Apuleius would fit perfectly in that category. Then again, if the mantra is "The first novel is what you want the first novel to be", then I guess it is not really a problem, as there would be as many answers as there would be opinions on the subject. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the endearingly sophomoric question of "what was the first novel ever written" reveals more about the nature and needs of the inquirer and the responder than those of the novel. The interchange best belongs in a quiet bar, conducive to seduction. ;> Paulscrawl (talk) 16:03, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

european cars in Egypt

In Egypt, I know that they drive Peugeot cars and Citroen cars due to the fact Peugeot and Citroen have their own assembly lines in that country. What about Renault? Do Egyptians drive Renault? Also, do they drive Italian cars Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Maserati and Lancia? Do they drive British cars Aston Martin, Bentley, Jaguar, Land Rover, Rolls-Royce, and Vauxhall? Do they drive Volvo and Saab? Do they drive Audi, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volkswagen, Porsche, Opel and smart? Do they drive Japanese cars Mazda, Nissan, Honda, Toyota and Mitsubishi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.52.31 (talk) 18:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, to be brief, you're looking for a ranking of the most popular cars, by brand name, in Egypt? Dismas|^(talk) 02:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Business Today Egypt, Hyundai led the way in 2008 with 26% of passenger car sales. Another article says Mercedes-Benz and BMW were "neck-and-neck for 2005" (1634 to 1683). Clarityfiend (talk) 03:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is yes, to all of them, I am certain that all of those brands are present on Egyptian roads in some form or another. As for having a current new vehicle sales presence I can tell you that almost all of the brands you list are available in Egypt although the sales numbers of some are likely low. The only ones without a sales presences I can think of would be Vauxhall as it is a UK only brand and I don't think Lancia or Alfa Romeos are there sold right now. Saab is up in the air and I would be surprised if one could buy a new Saab in Egypt right now. --Leivick (talk) 06:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cars in Bangladesh

Which cars do Bangladeshi people drive often? Toyota? Nissan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.52.31 (talk) 18:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, I didn't pay to much attention on that. One thing though, they don't drive Indian cars at least. --Soman (talk) 14:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By brand, I don't know. But I can give you the official government statistics for type of car: [2]. It's about 52% motorcycles (even more in recent years), 12% auto-rickshaws, 15% standard motorcars and taxis, 17% larger vehicles, and 4% who-knows-what. --M @r ē ino 18:31, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]